Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
A two-year clinical evaluation of a new calcium aluminate cement in Class II cavities
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Odontology, Dental Hygiene. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Odontology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Odontology, Cariology. Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Odontology.
2003 (English)In: Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, ISSN 0001-6357, Vol. 61, no 4, 235-40 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A calcium aluminate cement (Doxa Certex, Uppsala, Sweden) has recently been developed intended for use as direct restorative filling material for posterior restorations. The material is inorganic and non-metallic and the main components are CaO, Al2O3, SiO2, and water. The aim of this study was to evaluate intra-individually the experimental calcium aluminate cement (CAC) and a resin composite (RC) in Class II restorations. Each of 57 participants received at least one pair of restorations of the same size, one CAC and one RC (Tetric Ceram). Sixty-one pairs were performed. The restorations were evaluated clinically, according to slightly modified USPHS criteria, at baseline, after 6 months, 1, and 2 years. One-hundred-and-twenty restorations were evaluated at 2 years. Postoperative sensitivity was reported for 5 restorations (2 RC, 3 CAC). Significantly better clinical durability was shown for RC. Five non-acceptable CAC restorations (8.2%) were observed at 6 months, 10 CAC (16.7%) and 2 RC (3.3%) at 12 months, and 11 CAC (18.3%) at 24 months. This resulted in a cumulative failure frequency of 43.3% for the CAC material and 3.3% for the RC material. Main reasons for failure for the CAC were partial material fracture (7), cusp fracture (5), and proximal chip fracture (6). The CAC showed a non-acceptable clinical failure rate for Class II restorations, probably caused by its difficult handling and low mechanical properties.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis , 2003. Vol. 61, no 4, 235-40 p.
Keyword [en]
Cement, ceramic, clinical, composite resin, dental restorations
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-17138DOI: 10.1080/00016350310004575PubMedID: 14582592OAI: diva2:156811
Available from: 2007-11-02 Created: 2007-11-02 Last updated: 2010-08-25Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Calcium aluminate cement as dental restorative: Mechanical properties and clinical durability
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Calcium aluminate cement as dental restorative: Mechanical properties and clinical durability
2004 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In 1995, the Swedish government recommended the discontinuation of amalgam as restorative in paediatric dentistry. Because the mercury content in amalgam constitutes an environmental hazard, its use has declined. The use of resin composites is increasing, but the polymerisation shrinkage of the material is still undesirably high, and the handling of uncured resin can cause contact dermatitis. A new restorative material has recently been developed in Sweden as an alternative to amalgam and resin composite: a calcium aluminate cement (CAC). CAC has been marketed as a ceramic direct restorative for posterior restorations (class I, II) and for class V restorations. This thesis evaluates mechanical properties and clinical durability of the calcium aluminate cement when used for class II restorations. Hardness, in vitro wear, flexural strength, flexural modulus, and surface roughness were evaluated. A scanning electron replica method was used for evaluation of the interfacial adaptation to tooth structures in vivo. The durability was studied in a 2-year intra-individually clinical follow-up of class II restorations.

Major results and conclusions from the studies are as follows:

• The CAC was a relatively hard material, harder than resin-modified glass ionomer cement but within the range of resin composites. The CAC wore less than resin-modified glass ionomer cement but more than resin composite.

• Flexural strength of CAC was in the same range as that of zinc phosphate cement and far below that of both resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Flexural modulus of CAC was higher than both resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement. The low flexural strength of CAC precludes its use in stress-bearing areas.

• Surface roughness of CAC could be decreased by several polishing techniques.

• For CAC restorations, interfacial adaptation was higher to dentin but lower to enamel compared with resin composite restorations. Fractures were found perpendicular to the boarders of all CAC restorations and may indicate expansion of the material.

• After 2 years of clinical service, the class II CAC restorations showed an unacceptably high failure rate. Material fractures and tooth fractures were the main reasons for failure.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå universitet. Institutionen för odontologi, 2004. 67 p.
Umeå University odontological dissertations, ISSN 0345-7532 ; 84
mechanical properties, clinical, restorations, ceramic, cement, resin composite, adaptation, SEM
Research subject
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-270 (URN)91-7305-589-1 (ISBN)
Public defence
2004-06-03, Tandläkarhögskolan 9 tr, Sal D, Norrlands universitetssjukhus, Umeå, 09:00 (English)
Available from: 2004-05-12 Created: 2004-05-12 Last updated: 2010-08-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Dijken, Jan W. V. vanSunnegårdh-Grönberg, Karin
By organisation
Dental HygieneDepartment of OdontologyCariology
In the same journal
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 24 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link